while house speaker john boehner and more than 100 members of congress call for congress to have a bigger say in this decision. meanwhile, prime minister cameron and the uk parliament will convene to debate their role in this crisis. that debate could have an echo effect here at home. in the middle a debate over military action, three generations of presidents led thousands in commemorating the anniversary of martin luther king's dream. good morning, it's thursday, august 29, 2013. i'm chuck todd. my first reads of the morning. we begin is syria and that drumbeat apparently for war is a bit slower today. according to the administration, a strike could come as early as today. the president says he hasn't made a final decision and more than 100 lawmakers from both parties say if he opts for an attack, he should get congressional approval first. with that in mind, the white house will hold a conference call today with the chairman and ranking members of key senate

and news committees. on that call, they will reportedly share the classified details of findings regarding last week's chemical weapons attack that opposition forces say killed more than 1,000 people. at least some of those details will be made public as well. we should note that the ap quotes intelligence officials as saying the evidence linking president assad to the attack is, quote, no slam dunk. remember that phrase? nevertheless, while speaking on pbs last night, the president said there has to be consequences. but that doesn't mean there has to be an all-out war. >> if, in fact, we can take limited, tailored approaches, not getting drawn into a long conflict, not a repetition of, you know, iraq, which i know a lot of people are worried about. but if we are saying in a clear

and decisive but very limited way, we send a shot across the bow saying stop doing this, this can have a positive impact on our national security over the long term. >> but many members of congress aren't on board. at least not yet. house speaker john boehner weighed in wednesday sending a letter to the president in which he laid out 14 questions he believed the president had to answer before launching a strike on syria. calling on the president to, quote, make the case to the american people and congress for how potential military action will secure american national security interests. he didn't say he was calling for congressional authorization yet. president obama addressed, though, the issue that's been brought up by boehner and others, by raising the specter of an attack here at home. >> there is a prospect, a possibility, in which chemical weapons, they can have devastating effects, could be directed at us. and we want to make sure that

that does not happen. >> if he can make the case, congressional lawmaker, say the president still needs their okay. in a letter signed by more than 100 lawmaker, they argued that, quote, engaging without prior congressional authorization wouldconstitution. 18 democrats added their signature, to that letter and got support today from a democratic senator, tim kaine. >> there are some circumstances where presidents to defend the nation or to avoid a catastrophe can act prior to getting congressional approval but getting congressional approval is, in my view, required. >> british lawmakers are pumping the brakes as well. the prime minister has agreed to wait for their findings before deciding on the next step. parliament will hold two votes before any military action is taken by the uk. the u.n. team is now on its third day of inspections in syria. they will do one more tomorrow and be out by saturday.

they will report their findings as soon as they are out. obama administration officials say, by the way, the delay in britain, while it's a potential setback, they believe it's manageable and it doesn't mean the u.s. would need to wait to engage syria militarily. meantime, any hopes of getting the united nations security council behind a strike went up in smoke almost immediately wednesday. during the meeting of the five permanent members, russia made it clear it wouldn't back a syria resolution so it wasn't even brought up for a vote. on wednesday, putin reached out to the new president of iran, bashar al assad's other key ally in the region, and the two leaders warned any attack could destabilize the entire region. russia decided to send a couple of warships to the mediterranean where there are a bunch of u.s. ships now. britain is sending jets to cyprus. the entire region braces for a possible war.

nbc's chief foreign correspondent richard edngel is live for us. as commander and chief of the u.s. armed forces southern command, also an expert in chemical warfare and of course is an msnbc military analyst. and former florida congressman robert wexler is president of the abraham center for middle east peace. i want to start with you, richard, the evidence that the white house is going to share with congressional lawmakers today appears to be very strong but circumstantial evidence. is there any doubt in the minds of the rebels that you've been talking to that assad was behind this? do you think there was a possibility that a rogue agent of assads may have done this without assad's approval? >> there is always some doubt. we've spoken to rebel groups and i've spent a lot of time with the rebels. if some of these extremist groups had chemical weapons, i have no doubt they would use

them. some of the groups that are operating in syria right now could, by almost any standard, be considered terrorist groups. but terrorists j s don't genera attack themselves. it's unclear if they would have the delivery systems to launch a sophisticated kind of chemical attack on a large area. so the rebel movements they say they certainly didn't do it, but i can't vouch for every group that is operating in the country right now. but the longer this goes on, no matter how good the case is, the more momentum is slowed down. you mentioned the uk labor party. demanding extra votes. the red cross just said it thinks escalatation would further worsen the humanitarian crisis in the country which is enormous. egypt doesn't support it. the arab league doesn't support military action. even if it has great circumstantial evidence, the u.s. could be going it not alone but with a smaller and smaller group behind it. >> general mccaffrey, that's

what it looks -- richard said not going it alone but you start looking around and the united states may end up having to go it alone militarily because the uk may not be there in time. maybe they'll be able to help pay for it later. if there is all this international doubt being raised, and, again, we know it has to do with iraq, there are these iraq nightmares essentially that politicians are having here, across the pond in the uk, we get all that. but if there's not the international support, does the president need to back off? >> well, i think there's two things. you notice general clapper, the director of national intelligence, is now carefully hedging his bets on whether we have direct evidence that this was either tied to assad or to his senior people. and these terrorist groups, which are associated with the rebellion, could well have obtained chemical weapons captured from the syrian army. they could have introduced these chemicals into underground bunkers. we've got to rule that out.

it would be a disaster if it came out six months from now that we attacked another sovereign nation with faulty intelligence. i think the other thing, which richard really set up, was how do you go to war where there's not a shred or threat to u.s. national security directly without involving congress? why aren't they being held to a vote, assent of congress? >> if you were in congress, would you be asking for a vote? >> i don't think a vote is required. i think consent is required. i respectfully differ a bit with the general. the use of weapons of mass destruction, the use of chemical weapons to kill hundreds of people, is, in fact, a direct contradiction to the national security interests of the united states. because it is not just a limited strike in syria. what it sends is a message to north korea, to syria, again, to iran maybe more importantly,

that the use of these weapons will not be punished and that, in effect, they will be tolerated. that, if the president does not act, will be result. and i think the president has essentially spoken to the issue by saying that any con sttempla action will be targeted and limited. >> general, i want to bring you in, by outlining how minimal it's going to be, that it's a shot across the bow, essentially, you know, don't do this again, bashar al assad, does that make the idea of a military strike seem less useful because civilians could get killed and it wasn't designed to do anything other than be a shot across the bow? >> this was some of the most confused muddled political thinking we have seen in 25 years. we told assad we're not going after you, we're not going to try and effect the outcome of the war. we will not go after your

chemical weapon storage sites. and we think this limited strike will send a message to you. what happens when he escalates? what happens when he detonates chemical weapons during the strike and says it was caused by the u.s. tomahawk missiles? what happens when he uses chemicals three days later on the civilian population? we are not thinking clearly about a political objective and the military measures required to achieve that objective. >> damascus saying they're fully prepare to retaliate. all of this warning that's been done by the united states, very public, it's a very public timetable that a potential strike is coming as early as today. this is the window supposedly now open. we know of. what have you seen from your sources about how assad is preparing? >> assad is mostly preparing the minds of the people. this feeds into the conspiracy

theory that the world is against him. that terrorists are working in concert with israel and in concert with the united states, in concert with turkey. that those terrorists are determined to reach damascus and kill everyone in the city. damascus is still quite firmly under government control. and that the united states hasn't been successful enough in getting the terrorists to arrive inside the castle so now they're going to fabricate these claims and help the terrorists get one step further. that's the message being presented to people in damascus. we're not seeing any visible activation of troops. they're trying to say life is normal on the streets. no extra checkpoint, no mass exodus. some repairs are going on in the city. traffic is a little lighter. people we've spoken to said the government is deliberately trying to maintain an air of

calm and normalcy. >> one of the things the president said last night about national security interests, this is a direct threat to national security interests, talking about israel, nato bases in turkey, all along the borders of syria. is there a concern, though, that the launching of the military strike against assad, that he retaliates by attacking israel? clearly the israelis are worried about this. >> of course there's a concern. i think it's important to outline this is a national security interest to the united states because of america. you and i and our children and all of us don't want to live in a world in which rogue nations employ weapons of mass destruction such as chemical weapons. but there's also other interest here. the credibility of the u.s. we must prevent iran from becoming a nuclear weapon holder. if the president does not react in some type of accountable way to the use of chemical weapons, what message does that send to iran? what message does that send to north korea?

the generally rightfully says, well, it's a muddled message so far. the president will need to define that and the actions that follow will no doubt define it. >> general, tell me the mission then. tell me the mission as it should be outlined. why isn't anybody, for instance, talking about, okay, the mission is to secure and -- those chemical weapons and essentially take them away from assad. why isn't that part of this mission? >> well, i think it's not achievable. you'd have to intervene on the ground. actually find his disstressed h disbursed heavily guarded weapons. >> that means no strike, essentially is what you're saying, is going to prevent him from the ability of using chemical weapons again? >> think a strike could achieve it if you told the air force and naval air, you've got 60 days to take out his high performance aircraft, his armed helicopter, command and control, knock out

all his tanks, delivery system. you give him 60 days, probably assad goes under and then we live with the bloody civil war that will ensue in which the allowite minority shia, hezboll hezbollah, the revolutionary guard, all battle it out in the streets. >> the concern of escalation, if the u.s. strikes, are things going to escalate regardless of whether the u.s. strikes assad or not? >> the things are so fluid right now in the country. you have the free syrian army. that's the one group of rebels that the united states supports. they were the ones that brought john mccain into the country and they're the one rebel movement that sort of thinks in a moderate way and wants a free and democratic society. i would say right now they're probably not the majority. they're probably 30 or 40% of the rebels. the other 60% roughly are radical groups that many of them are allied are al qaeda.

they are, now, openly on the streets. they are also worried that if there is a u.s. strike, there could be simultaneously strikes against the islamists. so islamist fighters have been leaving some of their headquarters, mingering with populations on the streets. they're doing some armed patrols at night. and are asserting their security and their control in case there is a breakdown of law and order. in case there is just enough opportunity for them to make a run for damascus. so the situation is, as general mccaffrey was describing, incredibly difficult on the ground. if the united states in a dream scenario, what would happen is assad falls, the fsa wins and there is no ethnic cleansing and we have a new government. but without backing the fsa which hasn't happened, allowing these other groups to bet better and not really doing much against assad, i don't see how a minor escalation is going to

change much. >> if we couldn't control the outcome in egypt, i don't think we expect that in syria. is there a compelling case not to do anything? >> there may be a koppeling case not to do anything in terms of avoiding any unintended consequences, that would be a short term to me compelling case. but a long-term disaster. we need to keep our eye on the ball. the ball is punishment and deterrence. and to get us into a better position for a political resolution between the syrian government and the opposition. doing nothing doesn't get us there. >> former congressman robert wexler, very well briefed on these issues in the middle east. general mccaffrey, always a pleasure. and of course richard engel, stay safe. we will keep a close eye on syria. we'll have more on this syria debate here at home. there's a fiery debate getting under way in the british parliament. that starts in just a few moments. we'll try to get some highlights of that. questions for congress though. a growing number are calling for a vote to authorize the military

action. we've got senators from both sides of the aisle coming u on just how involved congress should be. first, a look ahead at today's politics planner. heavy on syria, as we told you. ♪ ho ho ho [ female announcer ] at 100 calories, not all food choices add up. some are giant. some not so giant. when managing your weight, bigger is always better. ♪ ho ho ho ♪ green giant

humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us. plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?

with olay regenerist eye and lash duo. the serum instantly thickens and defines lashes. the cream smooths and softens the look of lines. ♪ so wow! another eye opener from olay.

still to come here on "the daily rundown," more of the morning's first read. stand in the shadow of martin luther king jr. plus, what bill clinton said during the march on washington celebration that's got us wondering who he was talking about. first, today's trivia question.

first person to tweet the correct answer to @chucktodd and @dailyrundown coming up.wh safe driving bonus check. rock beats scissors! [ chuckles ] wife beats rock. and with two checks a year, everyone wins. [ female announcer ] switch today and get two safe driving bonus checks a year for driving safely. only from allstate. call 866-906-8500 now. [ dennis ] zach really loves his new camera. problem is...this isn't zach. it's a friend of a friend who was at zach's party and stole his camera. but zach's got it covered... with allstate renters insurance. [ female announcer ] protect your valuables for as low as $4 a month when you add renters insurance to your allstate auto policy. call 866-906-8500 now. what are you doing? we're switching car insurance. why? because these guys are the cheapest. why? good question. because a cut-rate price could mean cut-rate protection. you should listen to this guy. [ female announcer ] with allstate you get great protection and a great price, plus an agent! drivers who switched saved an average of $498 a year.

call now and see how much you can save. just a few more ways allstate is changing car insurance for good. [ female announcer ] call an allstate agent and get a quote now. that your mouth is under attack, from food particles and bacteria. try fixodent. it helps create a food seal defense for a clean mouth and kills bacteria for fresh breath. ♪ fixodent, and forget it. accomplishing even little things can become major victories. i'm phil mickelson, pro golfer. when i was diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis, my rheumatologist prescribed enbrel for my pain and stiffness, and to help stop joint damage. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis,

lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. you should not start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have symptoms such as persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. since enbrel helped relieve my joint pain, it's the little things that mean the most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven.

and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger. back now with more first read. since he was elected president obama has always appeared to walk a tight rope whenever the issue of race comes up. this morning on the yolanda adams morning radio show, obama talked about what dr. king might have thought about the speech yesterday. >> this is the biggest challenge. i think if dr. king came back today and saw the progress that we've made, he would say that we've made incredible progress in civil rights and how people are treated. the mere fact that an african-american could be elected president would be mind-boggling to him. on the other hand, if he looked at the economic situation, he would say that inequality that still exist, the wealth gap that

still exists, the inner city poverty that's still out there, we haven't made as big a stride on that front as we should have. >> president's speech at the lincoln memorial was similar to how he's tackled the issue of race in the past. focusing on the larger message of income and equality. >> the men and women would gather 50 years ago were not there in search of some abstract idea. they were there seeking jobs as well as justice. not just the absence of oppression but the presence of economic opportunity. this tie, we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and asian children and hispanic children and native american children. >> let's bring in our thursday gaggle. former top aide to dennis hastert john fury. politico correspondent anna palmer. and president of the center for

american progress nira and tand. welcome all. if you talk to african-american political activists, and there were plenty at the mall yesterday who, disappointed is not the right word to use with the president's speech but they wanted something else. and they've always been that way about president obama. and he has never comes to race. i would argue going back to when he campaigned to be harvard law review president. >> i think he broke down the conversation really well. i mean, for anyone who couldn't see the kind of monumental change, having an african-american president, means. not just for the country but really for the world. i mean, that's obvious. on the other hand, i think he really admitted we have growing inequality in the country and in some ways things are really not better. the wealth gap is actually almost the same as it was in

1963 and the differences we've made in that arena. and that conversation is more open to, you know, all americans. >> this is an economic class issue. >> right, and, you know -- >> includes a lot of poor whites too. >> white working class, chat contin latino americans. everyone is experiencing that wealth gap that has gotten worse in the last couple of year because of the recession. >> the other thing people forget about president obama is i think he's always thinking that he wants the audience for his speech not just to be black americans but, as i always said, maybe his white relatives in kansas. >> your point is well taken in the sense that he doesn't talk about race very often. very rarely. certainly you saw on the mall -- was it a very good reaction, pretty calm, and a couple moments where they got more enthusiastic but certainly wasn't a message a lot were hoping to hear from him. where he kind of lumps all of the equalities together, kind of beyond a post-racial sense. >> i really disagree.

i think there was a lot of very good reaction. >> he wasn't trying to rouse the crowd. i think that's also the mistake in the way people judged the speech. you can't always judge it -- it was not an outdoor speech, you know, even though he's speaking outdoors. >> i think if you look at the speech and tried to compare it, which is hard to compare with the 1963 speech, it was just flat. it didn't hit any spiritual tones. >> but he didn't design -- >> everyone looked at it through the context of dr. king's speech and i think that the speech was not -- >> you know, what's interesting, jesse jackson was in the media scrums talking. he said, don't judge the president, to dr. king. judge the president's speech to lbj. the one lbj speech i really liked is lbj's howard commencement speech in 1965. it was a speech about inequality. he also goes through some

actions he believes needs to be taken. that wasn't there in the president's speech yesterday. >> i do think he called out some of the racism. you know, a lot of people are seeing today. voting rights, other issues. for progressives, it was a great response to the speech. i do think he, you know, a lot issues people are seeing today are in the economic inequality fight. and he gave voice to those. and made it not part of economic inequality but a broader civil rights -- >> i want to play my favorite quote from a speech that was not give be by this president, but by a former president. bill clinton had an interesting comment about gridlock. >> but we don't face beating, lansings and shootings for our political beliefs anymore. i would respectfully suggest that he did not live and die to hear his heirs whine about gridlock. >> you worked there in gridlock back in the day.

interesting, coming from clinton. who was he directing that message to? >> what bill clinton is a master at is finding where he had to make common ground eventually. he understood he had to get to a place and reach an agreement. i don't think president obama has put in his head where he will reach an agreement with republicans. >> he would argue these republicans, the republicans of the '90s were more likely to work with clinton -- >> newt gingrich is every bit as radical and more radical than john boehner. >> i don't think anybody's calling john boehner necessarily -- but you look at the next month, you know, debt ceiling, funding fights, it is going to be, you know, total gridlock here and we're all going to be sitting there waiting to see if the government shuts down. >> the question is, is ted cruz more radical than newt gingrich. >> ted cruz is not running this show. >> i ask you, since you're representing the republicans here on this panel, the bushes couldn't go, there were health

reasons why neither president bush could go and speak. other republicans leaders were invited to speak and they declined. in hindsight, do you wish there had been republicans? >> i find it completely shocking that tim scott was not invited. i think for the most -- the symbolic person in the world from the south, the republicans, in the south -- >> why didn't boehner and cantor -- >> they had it on the schedule. i think they made a mistake. >> by going, they probably could have said, by the way, we want you to invite tim scott, and i don't thing the king family says no. >> there were some mistakes made. >> it felt -- >> the fact that tim scott was not inviting -- >> i will leave it there. we will talk serious politics. which is becoming more fascinating by the day. with the white house set to brief high ranking members of congress on syria today, we'll talk to two members the senate foreign relations committee. republican ron johnson both join me next.

and for even more, check out our website, rundown.msnbc.com. the conversation continues all day long on our facebook page. like us, whatever you have to do with it. you're watching "the daily rundown." as a trainer, i see a lot of people

missing workouts because of sports injuries. runner's knee... ...it's right there. shin splints... ...it hurt right on this side. injuries like these can come from the pounding your feet take. but i found something that helps. dr. scholl's active series insoles with triple zone protection

to help reduce pain from three sports injuries: runner's knee, shin splints, plantar fasciitis. i can feel the difference. i'm a believer. i'm back working out. i'm a believer. try dr. scholl's active series. i'm a believer. ready in a minute dad. what's the 411? i can meet you in the car. nah, bro! i'm cool. i'm just chillmaxin'. is there something that you wanted? we can't just spend a little qt as a posse? on the download? dad, why are you talking like that? i was just hoping you would give me the last piece of bacon.

holler! holla... i don't know. [ male announcer ] when it comes to common language we all speak bacon. the very best cuts naturally hardwood smoked. it's unanimous food. it's oscar mayer. we're expecting the british parliament to begin an emergency debate session on syria any minute now. back here at hope, the white house will make the case to lawmakers today. joining me now, new jersey democratic senator bob men nen does, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. senator, very simply, do you think congress should authorize something, authorize the ability for the president to strike before he makes that decision? >> well, look, i think it would be desirable both for the president and to send an international message but i also recognize under the war powers act the president has the right

to act. if that action prolongs itself into a 60 day period, then he has, from my perspective, he has to come to congrethe congress. >> are you concerned over the past 24 hours, the arab league, tough statement on assad but doesn't want military action. we've seen what's going on in the british parliament. they're beginning their debate. clearly the labor party in particular would like to tap the brakes. we know there are plenty who feel the same way. is the president moving too fast? >> look, i think the president is proceeding with caution. he is availing himself of all evidence of -- that he can deduce from his intelligence reports, from the sharing of intelligence with other countries. i think that today we'll be having a phone call with a bipartisan leadership, and the house and the senate, of all of the relevant committees, including my own. i'll look forward to what the administration has to say there. i know the other side of this, chuck, would be people will say,

well, assad used chemical weapons once, now a second time, and we are not going to send a global message if we don't go ahead and have some form of action here that is counsel consequential to the regime. >> what should be the mission here if the president chooses to strike? should it be to make it so that assad physically isn't able to use chemical weapons again, or a warning shot that says, if you do it again, it will be worse? what is the specific goal of the mission as you understand it to be? >> well, i haven't heard yet what the mission is. i can say it seems to me it has to be consequential. i think the president referred to that in his remarks recently. those consequences can have a variety of elements to it. you can strike at critical assets that the regime needs. generation plans.

traffic choke points. you can strike at a particular aircraft so it doesn't ultimately have the ability to deliver the missile systems that can deliver the chemical weapons. there's a variety of options here that would be very consequential, give the regime a message and globally send a message that you can't use chemical weapons against innocent civilians. this is beyond even syria now from my perspective. about whether or not the world will send a message you cannot permit chemical weapons to be used. >> the world has to send a message. do you believe our national security interests are at stake? >> i do. look -- >> explain how. >> if you can have chemical weapons used inside of syria with impunity, then the next thing is those who have access to those chemical weapons will begin potentially to say, hey, nothing will happen, let me use the chemical weapons. that can be used against an alley. could be used against any of our troops globally. i just believe that inaction

ultimately breeds confidence in those who have access to chemical weapons they can use it without consequence. >> do you think the president should have acted three months ago the first time the red line was crossed or that there was strong evidence that the red line was crossed on the use of chemical weapons? >> look, i think the president has to make his decision when it is appropriate to use military force to pursue the national interest and security of the united states. and i think that this time when we see 355 citizens die, when we see that both the methods used, the tactics, delivery system, pretty much point to the regime, that having not just united states but i hope some of our partners will join us in this, will ultimately send that global message that you can't use chemical weapons. and so, you know, it's interesting, i'm sure there will be those who clamor now for having a voice and at the same

time they'd be critical of the president if he didn't act. >> let me ask you this, is there a compelling case not to act militarily? >> from my perspective, i think there is a compelling case to act. in a -- >> you don't think there's one -- >> in a limited way -- >> -- to not act? >> i do not see a compelling case not to act at the end of the day. there's always risk. look, nothing in syria is easy. nothing in syria has good choices in it. but if you permit a global message that the use of chemical weapons can be done with impunity, then i think you're buying yourself a much bigger challenge in the world. >> all right. bob menendez, senator, thank you for coming on. now i want to go across the aisle, literally and physically here, ron johnson, republican member of the senate foreign relations committee. you just heard your chairman there. any disagreements? >> what i like to point out is, you know, sadd, the assad regim

has crossed the red line a long time ago. they've been slaughtering innocent civilians -- >> you're comfortable with the intelligence that says that -- >> no, i'd use slaughtering no matter what they use. they've been kill, slaughtering their citizens. we've had a national security interest at stake here for more than two years. >> you would have acted a lot sooner? >> i'm not saying i would have acted. the other side of the equation is who do you replace the assad regime with. what i'm asking for is what is the strategy of this administration. i certainly believe that president obama should go first and foremost to the american pick a public and explain what is the national interest in syria. i think there is a national security interest because of those chemical weapons stockpile. i think he also should come to congress for approachal. what's the rush at this point in time? we've sat and dithered for more

than two years. >> you don't feel like two weeks -- you guys don't come back into session -- >> the slaughter has been going on for more than two years. our national security has been at risk in that devolving and degrading situation for two years. another two weeks, another three weeks to actually get the world to send that message. if it's just the u.s., that's not going to be effective. basically, the assad regime and russia would say, oh, there's not much in terms of consequences here. you need to have a very well thoughtout strategy. you need to set goals that are achievable. you have to understand, what's the aftermath? who is going to take over syria? what is going to be the governing structure in the assad regime falls. >> if the lawmakers -- to me it's very rational you have the lab either paror party in britaf republicans here feeling bushed by iraq and wmds. there's this collective pause going on.

perfectly rational way that politicians think after something like this happens. if the public is never behind it. let's say all of you agree but the public never gets behind it, does that make it harder? even if you feel like you've laid out the case as well as you can lay it out? >> i think it's essential. if we put our -- the finest in harm's way, the american people need to support that action. it is incumbent. the job of the president to make that case. >> -- in syria they'll support? i can't tell you how many people sit there and say, gees, why is it always the united states that has to police the world? >> that is for the president to make the case. it's his job. >> can you make that case? what about to your constituents? sounds like you would vote, if it's a koppeling case -- you want to hear what at case is -- >> ci also need to know who are the rebels. we don't know. >> what would be your case to your constituents?

>> part of the problem in how this situation has degraded over 2 1/2 years is because of lack of american leadership. because the president did not assemble that coalition of the willing. the rebels that maybe were initially more western leaning, more democratic, they've been supplanted by a more al qaedabacked rebel so now we're at a point 2 1/2 years later, 100,000 syrians slaughtered and we don't even know who would replace him. it's an incredibly difficult situation. i don't envy anybody with that responsibility. the president is the commander in chief. he has to lead. he has to make the case. >> you're in town here because you have meetings at the white house today on the budget. optimistic? you've been a part of this longtime budget talks with the white house for a while now. >> i appreciate the fact that we are talking. that's a good sign. we've got the continuing resolution coming u. we've got the debt ceiling increase. we need to take government shutdown, those types of things, off the table. we've got to start working towards real solutions. it starts with defining the

problem. $7,200. we've got some problems that need to be addressed now. >> i want to bring you back and talk budget but obviously syria was the subject. now, more from the gaggle on the pressure on the president. another middle east conflict. how does he do that if he chooses to? license and registration please. what's this? uhh, it's my geico insurance id card, sir. it's digital, uh, pretty cool right? maybe. you know why i pulled you over today? because i'm a pig driving a convertible? tail light's out.. fix it. digital insurance id cards. just a click away with the geico mobile app.

the next powerful storm is going to hit... but it will... that's why there's a new duracell battery. introducing duracell quantum. with its high density core, it's a quantum leap in battery power. the next storm is out there. but so are the heroes. so we're giving a million duracell quantum to first responders everywhere. power. in the hands of the most powerful. duracell. trusted everywhere.

trivia time. you wanted to know, the last secretary of state to visit syria, colin powell. last sitting secretary of state to visit that country 2003, damascus. last time a sitting secretary of state was there. congratulations to today's winner. ivan the k. maybe one day he'll tell us what that "k" means. hey linda!

what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'.

and now we have this much larger use, and this does seem to me, and to president obama, and to president hollande that an appropriate moment to ask whether it's time to do something to stand up. you can't on the one hand accuse me of rushing into something but on the other hand say why you have waited for 14 attacks -- >> there's john cameron making the case to parliament. let's bring in the gaggle. a debate, john feehery that we're not going to see on the floor of the u.s. congress. >> and we should. i don't know how we're going to go on this thing. >> both parties more split the

this is not a natural political all reds are here, all the blues here. >> there's a huge hangover from iraq, and what is the sense, what will that accomplish? i think there's real misgivings. >> we had two interventionists now, both of them calling for some sort of intervention, but there's clearly a coalition. we saw it -- i think we saw that coalition in the bill on nsa, where you could see congress saying, don't do it. >> i think there's a lot of skepticism. we talked to a bunch of members on this, on the intel committee, those who you would think would go -- wait you need to see what they'll do. what is the purpose of this? everybody's war-weary. what does this accomplish for us? >> the cover of "time," you

know, is -- weekly news covers are meaningless anymore, we know that -- >> don't tell "time." >> i understand that. >> but i thought this was a very fitting cover. this president won the presidency, was going to be the guy to end these long wars. >> well, look, the president said, and i remember it well, he doesn't oppose all wars, just opposes stupid wars. the issue here in syria is the use of chemical weapons. the question before everyone is if that's a national security threat, the president and many of our european allies believe that allowing a country, especially in the middle east, to just use would help to destabilize world security. so that's the question. obviously we need to get a handle on the intelligence, but i think he would be able to bring democrats along if he was able to show there's real intelligence here and a national security threat. >> i think that's what the next

24 hours seems to be about. it's not just giving congress the case, but the public. they plan on releasing more, and it's interesting, it's not a slam dunk, adding the caveats. >> are they going to bring out colin powell? >> no, they're going to do it on background, give reporters and the public the paper. they're not going to have a person do it. >> i think they also have to tell people what is the end point here? will we -- the problem is when you get into a war like this, it's awfully hard to get out. >> i had somebody say what happening if you hit him and he does it again, we have to hit him again, and they may atta attack -- >> guess what? israel may counterattack. >> that could happen anyway. shamless plug. >> cat put out reports, and that's why i plugged them. >> what's this one? >> about the sequester's impact on head start and how 57,000 children will not be returning to school this year because of

sequester. >> ann? >> i've got working with my colleague on a series will military sexual assault. there's a landing page. check it out. >> what feehery theory do we have? >> the capitol hill little league. very excited for baseball. >> it is. that's it for this edition of "the daily rundown." college football starts tonight. oh joy! i'm serious. carolina will win the big game, i promise you. coming up next, chris jansing. bye-bye. na, our medicare agents sit down with you and ask. being active. and being with this guy. [ male announcer ] getting to know you is how we help you choose the humana medicare plan that works best for you. mi familia. ♪ [ male announcer ] we want to help you achieve your best health, so you can keep doing the things that are important to you. taking care of our customers. taking care of her. and the next thing on our list is bungee jumping. [ male announcer ] helping you -- now that's what's important to us.

a man who doesn't stand still. but jim has afib, atrial fibrillation -- an irregular heartbeat, not caused by a heart valve problem. that puts jim at a greater risk of stroke. for years, jim's medicine tied him to a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but now, with once-a-day xarelto®, jim's on the move. jim's doctor recommended xarelto®. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce afib-related stroke risk. but xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. so jim's not tied to that monitoring routine. [ gps ] proceed to the designated route. not today. [ male announcer ] for patients currently well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing the risk of stroke. xarelto® is just one pill a day taken with the evening meal. plus, with no known dietary restrictions, jim can eat the healthy foods he likes.

do not stop taking xarelto®, rivaroxaban, without talking to the doctor who prescribes it as this may increase the risk of having a stroke. get help right away if you develop any symptoms like bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto® and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. xarelto® is not for patients with artificial heart valves. jim changed his routine. ask your doctor about xarelto®. once a day xarelto® means no regular blood monitoring -- no known dietary restrictions. for more information and savings options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com.

(announcer) bring the adventure to their bowl with a for more information and savings options, whole world of exciting flavors. friskies. feed the senses. good morning. i'm in for chris jansing. right now heated debate in the british parliament over what to do in syria. lynn to david cameron just nomts ago. >> when people talk about escalation, it's as if the world's community, not just britain, stand back and do nothing. >> all right. 3:00 local time there, as they continue the debate in london.

this morning congress will be briefed on the possibility of military action, even though the president says he has not made any decisions yet. >> first of all, i have not made a decision. i have gotten options from our military. i had extensive talks with the national security team. we are consulting with our allies, with the international community, and, you know, i have no interest in any kind of open-ended conflict in syria, about you we do have to make sure that when countries break international norms on weapons like chemical weapons that could threaten us, that they are held accountable. >> speaker john boehner sending a letter to the president, including 14 different questions about what the united states is trying to accomplish. pointedly asking in that her, quote -- what result is the administration seeking from its response? congressman mike rogers, head of the house intelligence